the rsync code currently does things like:
#ifdef HAVE_UTIMES
#elif defined HAVE_UTIME
#else
fail!
#endif
the problem here is when rsync detects the utimes function. the older utime
code is ifdef-ed away so it isnt available at runtime. that means rsync will
only be r
On Tuesday 25 March 2008, Stuart Halliday wrote:
> Is it so hard to not do this for people who don't want extra copies?
yes. now, not only do people need to remember/maintain a list of mailing
lists and how exactly they treat unmoderated posts, they need to
remember/maintain a list of specific
On Thursday 20 March 2008, Stuart Halliday wrote:
> > On Thursday 20 March 2008, Stuart Halliday wrote:
> > > Is it just me or a lot of people on this mailing list got into a bad
> > > habit of also carbon copying to the poster as well?
> >
> > sounds normal to me
>
> Hardly.
>
> Mailing lists send
On Thursday 20 March 2008, Paul Slootman wrote:
> On Thu 20 Mar 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > I subscribe to this mailing list. Why send me a duplicate copy? I get
> > > more than enough email thank you...
> >
> > most mailing lists detect such duplicates autom
On Thursday 20 March 2008, Stuart Halliday wrote:
> Is it just me or a lot of people on this mailing list got into a bad habit
> of also carbon copying to the poster as well?
sounds normal to me
> I subscribe to this mailing list. Why send me a duplicate copy? I get more
> than enough email thank
On Thursday 21 February 2008, Vitorio wrote:
> Hello people,
in the future, please do not hijack threads
> the questio is all in the subject: Is there a way to force rsync to
> be monothreaded (ie to don't fork)?
> The reason for this is that the Carbon API isn't fork-safe and
> fonction calls I
On Wednesday 20 February 2008, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-02-20 at 22:17 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Wednesday 20 February 2008, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2008-02-20 at 16:06 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > tar jxf snapshot-xx
On Wednesday 20 February 2008, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-02-20 at 16:06 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > while anything is possible, i highly doubt it. emerge-webrsync
> > basically
> > unpacks a tarball and then uses rsync to copy that src tree to the dest
On Wednesday 20 February 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed 20 Feb 22:59 2008 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Wednesday 20 February 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > hello, I'm running an Gentoo distribution on my computer, lately I've
> > > started
On Wednesday 20 February 2008, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-02-20 at 21:55 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > hello, I'm running an Gentoo distribution on my computer, lately I've
> > started to get error messages that are rsync related. here is a log of
> > the output:
>
> [...]
>
> > rsy
On Wednesday 20 February 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> hello, I'm running an Gentoo distribution on my computer, lately I've
> started to get error messages that are rsync related. here is a log of the
> output:
>
> Fetching most recent snapshot
> Attempting to fetch file dated: 20080219
> porta
On Friday 25 January 2008, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2008, Sylvain Gargasson wrote:
> > Thanks for my RAM problem, it's OK now, Dell share me 32GB of RAM.
> >
> > But now when I try on my showroom with a lot of files in one directory I
> > have this error:
> >
> > sho-lnx-001:~ #
On Friday 18 January 2008, Paul Gear wrote:
> Hi. I'm trying to back up from an ext3 filesystem to an IOMega Rev USB
> cartridge drive, which uses a UDF filesystem. It appears to the system
> as /dev/scd0, but can be mounted in R/W mode.
>
> I get a bunch of errors like this:
> rsync: mkstemp
> "
On Saturday 01 December 2007, Paul Slootman wrote:
> On Sat 01 Dec 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > what's the deal with configure.sh ? if i take the rsync-3.0.0pre6
> > tarball, unpack it, and run `./configure && make`, the make process bombs
> > because of conf
what's the deal with configure.sh ? if i take the rsync-3.0.0pre6 tarball,
unpack it, and run `./configure && make`, the make process bombs because of
configure.sh. it looks like the rsync code is trying to use "configure.sh"
as its output instead of the standard "configure" ?
-mike
signatur
On Saturday 13 May 2006 20:26, Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 04:27:02PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > seems the behavior of rsync has changed when dealing with output and
> > using both -v and -q at the same time
>
> This comes about because of the new rpr
seems the behavior of rsync has changed when dealing with output and using
both -v and -q at the same time ... for example:
$ mkdir test1
$ touch test1/foo
$ rsync-2.6.0 -avq test1 test2
$ rm -r test2
$ rsync-2.6.8 -avq test1 test2
test1/
test1/fo
$ rm -r test2
$ rsync-cvs -avq test1 test2
buildin
when updating rsync in portage with the 2.6.0 release, i noticed we were still
applying the proxy auth patch ...
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg03596.html
looking through this list i found that the author of the patch e-mailed here
and it was supposed to be included with 2.6.0,
18 matches
Mail list logo
